Comments: Pittsburgh diocese plans for change

_[Bishop Duncan following conversation with the Archbishop of Sydney] explaining that both the See of Canterbury and the Lambeth Conference have been lost as instruments of communion._

Right - well that's it then. Lost, gone, end of story. Archbishop Drexel Gomez, you are too late.

Posted by Pluralist at Tuesday, 31 July 2007 at 7:11pm BST

There is a video clip of Duncan's talk on Stand Firm.

I am not sure who he thinks he is. So all-knowing and wise.

Posted by L Roberts at Tuesday, 31 July 2007 at 7:15pm BST

"The Lost": includes TEC, the ABC, and Lambeth . . . judged Duncan Almighty.

"He cited the willingness of presidents Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt to go further than the law allowed during times of national crisis."

Duncan means Lincoln's suspension of Habeas Corpus, and FDR's interning of Japanese-Americans.

Is it any wonder I argue it's an open question, whether or not this man is *possessed* by the Father of Lies?

Lord have mercy!

Posted by JCF at Tuesday, 31 July 2007 at 7:34pm BST

Nothing will please the Duncans, Ikers et al short of all gay clergy returning into the closet, the phasing out of women priests and bishops. and the abandonment of the 1979 BCP in favor of a version closer to 1662, including the 39 Articles of Religion as a standard of Anglican doctrinal orthodoxy and not as Historical Documents. Of course, TEC would have to depose Bishop V.G. Robinson for being openly gay--just to start the conversation with the Network bishops.

Posted by John Henry at Tuesday, 31 July 2007 at 8:03pm BST

It seems to me that removing Lambeth and Canterbury as "instruments of unity" would be a decision for the Anglican Communion as a whole not just for ++Peter Jensen and +Duncan. Would be nice to just be able to pick and choose whatever we want to define ourselves. Talk about acting unilaterally without consultation of the other provinces.

And actually, when you think about it, TEC (and to some extent the Anglican Church of Canada) is being accused of moving forward without consulting the other provinces, yet isn't this also what is happening with the crossing of provincial and diocesan boundaries and all the other events that are going on with the meetings of the "Global South" and of the Common Cause partners. Pot meet kettle. I know some will state that TEC et al started it but, even if that were the case, two wrongs do not a right make.

Posted by Ann Marie at Tuesday, 31 July 2007 at 8:24pm BST

From the article:

"A majority of the diocese's 20,000 members disagree with actions the Episcopal Church has taken since 2003, including a failure to stop same-sex blessings and the election of an openly gay bishop."

How exactly do we know this? Did someone poll the entire population of the diocese? And how big a majority are we talking about? One more than half? two-thirds? Three-quarters?

And is it a majority in every parish? Or just a majority of the parishes?

What happens to parishes where this view is not the majority? What happens to those who are in the minority in a parish where it is?

Duncan and his followers had better have plans for those situations...or they look like the kid who owns the ball and goes home because the other kids won't play his way.

Posted by Pat O'Neill at Tuesday, 31 July 2007 at 8:45pm BST

Like much else in Anglican realignment campaign text and subtext, these latest remarks from Duncan demonstrate that he thinks he is closer to God than just about anybody else could be, except for others who pledge closed-minded positions already inside his finalized con-evo circles. If I wanted that sort of way to follow Jesus of Nazareth, any number of other churches would do fairly well, up to and including becoming a Roman Catholic who takes monastic orders. Or maybe joining Opus Dei?

This realignment is all about the end of Anglicanism as a generous, open-minded, inquiring, and above all, factually educated community of believers who tend to ask questions first and shoot at all, hardly, if at all, later.

Doctrinal fisticuffs in the carefully drawn center rings of realigned Anglican con-evo faith, doors and windows - mind and heart and body - carefully closed by a whole ringing raft of presuppositions standing in for modern best practice critical methods, as if. These are our instruments of unity nowadays, alas, Lord have mercy.

Alas. It is Duncan who is failing as an instrument of pluralistic unity across all the former historic and emergent Anglican spectrums. He leads only inside his own settled and pat and conformed belief world.

The point? Deny, ignore, condemn - all compelling possibilites of prog-lib believerhood. Too simply, really. Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who is the most orthodox of all? Why Bishop Duncan of course.

Posted by drdanfee at Tuesday, 31 July 2007 at 8:46pm BST

Nothing to get excited about here--the Network is just making its monthly announcement that it is going to go any second now.

Posted by JPM at Tuesday, 31 July 2007 at 9:03pm BST

I tell you the "cancerous growth" in The Anglican Communion that +Akinola madly raves about isn't where he thinks it is growing.

Posted by Leonardo Ricardo at Tuesday, 31 July 2007 at 9:11pm BST

ditto to what John Henry said -- that about sums it up -- if the CofE splits about 50-50 with some joining the "Global South" & the others everyone else, where will Cantuar end up?

Posted by Prior Aelred at Tuesday, 31 July 2007 at 9:18pm BST

“'In this crisis, we’ve had no leader to lead,' he said. Asked if he thought that being in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury was essential to being Anglican, Bishop Duncan said that being obedient to scripture is of greater importance than being recognized by Canterbury."

Hooker must be shaking his head in heaven. But I'm sure Messrs Calvin and Knox are overjoyed.

Posted by Deacon Charlie Perrin at Tuesday, 31 July 2007 at 9:48pm BST

Well, the sadness of his thought process aside, it is certainly a relief to understand that Bishop Duncan now realizes that the Abuja/Network putsch is not working.

Perhaps Lambeth will be a more civil and renewing and uplifting experience, after all, for the vast majority of the Provinces who choose to remain in the Anglican Communion.

For Duncan and Iker and their minions, I hope that they will be both happy, and renewed, by their finally admitted full membership in the Abuja Communion.

Posted by Jerry Hannon at Tuesday, 31 July 2007 at 10:08pm BST

The great See of Caterbury has been a beacon of the catholic religion for many centuries without the approval of Bishop Duncan, Akinola, Jensen or any of their co-conspirators. And it will continue to shine long after their rage and furry has been forgotten. Really, the arrogance of the Bishop of Pittsburgh is almost beyond comprehension! It is becoming quite evident who the true Anglicans are. The Network can start whatever religion they want, but they shouldn't call themselves Anglicans. And they shouldn't try to abscond with the property!

Posted by garth at Tuesday, 31 July 2007 at 10:13pm BST

'Ambridge'-American Bridge and Steel.

Too bad it seems to be fabricator of destroying bridges in this day and age.

Posted by choirboyfromhell at Tuesday, 31 July 2007 at 10:56pm BST

It must be very exciting for the network folks right now. That level of righteousness involves lots of energy and endorphins.

After the split life will not be as stimulating at all. Then comes the mundane work of sorting out who joined them, how to organize... and dealing with lawsuits, financial issues, etc. as well as in-fighting among all these very strong willed people. Further splits among them are inevitable.

Once the exhiliration of the daily press releases and the provocative meetings and ultimatums goes away.... will it seem quite as fun?

And those who remain within TEC, what will they feel? Sadness... but also, I think, relief that energy can focus on feeding the hungry, housing the poor, and other works of charity instead of internal politics.

Posted by Richard at Wednesday, 1 August 2007 at 1:18am BST

>>>Hooker must be shaking his head in heaven. But I'm sure Messrs Calvin and Knox are overjoyed.

You raise an interesting point. The more I see of all this, the more convinced I am that what we are seeing now is the splitting apart of the Catholics and Calvinists who have been wedged uncomfortably into one church for these past four centuries.

When I see David Anderson grimly declaring on CNN that he remains in the church because "I like a good fight," and when I see an English bishop blaming flooding on gay men's rectal demons, and when I see people on a popular "reasserter" board seriously arguing over whether or not Rowan Williams is a Christian, I can't help but think that these people really and truly are the spiritual descendants of Oliver Cromwell.

Posted by JPM at Wednesday, 1 August 2007 at 1:43am BST

I know it comes across as a soap opera, choirboyfromhell, but is it not more like one of those silent comedies? The schismatic driver of an old open charabang has come off the road at a bend and is merrily heading towards the cliff edge, and half his passengers are jumping off before it tips over. Meanwhile the sedate coach driver behind has turned the corner...

Posted by Pluralist at Wednesday, 1 August 2007 at 1:53am BST

"God must be doing a new thing" says the man Robert Duncan.

Oh! OK... right... so, does this mean that evo-cath-cons are going stop moaning about liberal supposed 'innovations'?

Where in the Bible - that the man Robert Duncan is supposedly so unswervingly obedient to (over and above all else, such as conscience, tradition, critical-rational thought, empirical evidence, common decency etc) - does it say that God will 'do new things' only if it fits in with an evo-cath-con world/faith view, but never EVER 'do new things' that might be consonant with an inclusive, progressive, liberal world/faith view?

The man Robert Duncan HIMSELF must be the test of these things. Now that IS an important and new thing, isn't it? God must be doing an awesome new thing by raising this man up (together with the man Peter Jensen?) and granting him (them?) alone the authority to declare when God is doing a new thing and to castigate others for following the 'spirit of the age' and so on.

What a delusional, shameless farce!

Posted by matthewhunt at Wednesday, 1 August 2007 at 4:10am BST

Anyone reading the comments above would be forgiven for thinking that +Duncan is massively out of step with most of the AC and the cause of much division........he is a rare faithful Anglican in TEC but you do know that in most of the AC, he is no radical and not in a minority??

I think +Duncan is a bit hard on the spineless ABC....he has given us TWR and the Tanzania Communique so he is not letting a minority agenda dominate the AC......this is why I want all the GS to come to Lambet 08 and make sure (as in 1998) that the tail does not wag the dog - because the tail has not made a convincing theological case)

Posted by NP at Wednesday, 1 August 2007 at 8:59am BST

the veritable power of the keys, matthew hunt !

Posted by L Roberts at Wednesday, 1 August 2007 at 10:50am BST

matthewhunt - looks like you think you have made a strong point....
- just so you know, the difference is that +Duncan is basing his views and actions on the bible and Anglican tradition (other innovations are based on rejecting both the bible and tradition)

Posted by NP at Wednesday, 1 August 2007 at 11:06am BST

"Pot meet kettle."

and sweet musicke


Posted by Göran Koch-Swahne at Wednesday, 1 August 2007 at 11:29am BST

Pluralist-Not just an out of control stagecoach, more like spoiled brats who thought they were manipulating mommy, and after it became clear mommy showed more patience and understanding than they gambled on, their response is to condemn and discredit mommy.

One of those tiny circus cars than has an endless parade of clowns bailing out....

Posted by choirboyfromhell at Wednesday, 1 August 2007 at 11:38am BST

Duncan evidently "cited the willingness of presidents Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt to go further than the law allowed during times of national crisis" in conversation with "a reporter for the 'Living Church'", not in a public address. Duncan's connections to the wealthy Radical Right, in particular to Pittsburgh billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife, who bankrolled the American Spectator's anti-Clinton muckraking exercises in the 90's, and to Howard F. Ahmanson Jr (see past postings on TA), are well documented. His evident approval of "further than the law allowed" - which is to say illegal - activities by Lincoln and Roosevelt, activities now condemned by the vast majority of those who place these two among America's greatest presidents, is further indication of the nature of the attempted, now evidently floundering, right-wing putsch of which Duncan is a leader. More indication, if it were needed, that politics, not theology in the driving force in this whole sorry mess.

Posted by Lapinbizarre at Wednesday, 1 August 2007 at 1:21pm BST

Incidentally, Ephraim "IRD" Radner has just spoken out against Duncan's actions, in an article posted on (urk) Standfirm. He accuses Duncan of acting precipitously, and using exactly the same justification that the (ahem) rest of the heathen Episcopal Church is using to ordain (gasp!) practicing homosexuals. Radner said that Duncan could call his new church Anglican if he liked, but that Duncan was basically not doing things in a very Anglican fashion. I don't particularly like Radner, but I'd love to hear Duncan's response.

Posted by Weiwen at Wednesday, 1 August 2007 at 8:34pm BST

"the tail has not made a convincing theological case"

And, beloved-of-God NP, neither have you. :-)

[Waits for NP to respond "I'm NOT making a case! I'm only preaching the 2000 year-old Bible, and 'The Faith Once Delivered'!!!"]

Posted by JCF at Thursday, 2 August 2007 at 2:27am BST

Dear JCF, thanks for starting my reply ....I would add that I am making the case that the Anglican church is right in Lambeth 1.10 and it is crazy and wrong for some to expect vicars and bishops who reject it and teach others to do so to have full acceptance in the AC

Posted by NP at Thursday, 2 August 2007 at 12:18pm BST

"Lambeth 1.10"

For the last time NP, IT ISN'T LAMBETH 1.10!!!! Sorry to shout, but for God's sake, will you acknowledge that there is more to that statement than this one particular verse (since you seem to treat it as Scripture), that all parties have disobeyed it, and that even +Akinola admits is isn't binding.

Posted by Ford Elms at Thursday, 2 August 2007 at 1:09pm BST

It seems to me now that the broad Church and liberal weakness for putting up with much with which it does not agree is turning into its strength here. It should show willingness to engage (which it is anyway) all the way along, and be observant. The others are doing a fine job on their own of making a mess of things. Along this path two things can happen - one is that a group of schismatics do beak away, of Nigeria, Rwanda, Kenya, Uganada, Sydney and Pittsburgh (without the keys), and elsewhere a Communion gets re-established that is based on balancing the various traditions that make up Anglicanism - scriptures, traditions, reasoning.

It is a little optimistic as the road is bumpy anyway, but at the moment this is the way it seems to be going. Even those who would bang on some sort of discipline within the communion - who are not running off - are rather neutralising themselves. The Anglican Churches can but hope.

Posted by Pluralist at Thursday, 2 August 2007 at 2:27pm BST

This is interesting, including its choice of "defeat" language. It is another Radner type position:

An Open Letter to Rev. Prof. Stephen Noll
Written by Rev. Dr. Philip Turner

A move like this one reminds me of a constant theme in the history to date of Common Cause and some (not all) members of The Network. That is, a declaration of defeat is made at the outset of a struggle and then plans are laid for what to do in the face of the putative defeat already declared. Need I say that a strategy such as this carries all the marks of a self-fulfilling prophecy?

...I wish to comment on your call to the Network Bishops not to wait for "Windsor Bishops" but to unite under the leadership of Bob Duncan in fellowship with one another and with Common Cause Partners. It is a source of constant sadness to me that the Bishops within our Church who do not support the direction taken by its current structure have often been either too cautious to speak and act or too quick both to declare defeat and to begin constructing what appears to be an escape pod.

Posted by Pluralist at Thursday, 2 August 2007 at 3:02pm BST

The point that I accept it all....and I do not accept clergy have integrity in just ignoring it (any of it!!)

Posted by NP at Friday, 3 August 2007 at 5:11pm BST
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.